So in November I'll be moving onto the DC Health Link exchange, it seems. I can't use the calculator to assess the specific small business plans I'd be able to sign up for, but the individual plan calculator for me shows a gold plan costing $337, compared to around $600 that my current plan costs. My employer will pick up 3/4 of that in both scenarios, so my premium will drop from $150 (plus vision and dental) to $85 (plus vision and dental). That's pretty cool, if the small business plans pan out the same as the individual plans.

well, the cheapest plan it shows me is $245.47 a month with a $6000 deductible. if I want a reasonable deductible I can pay $355.90 a month for a $1000 deductible.

I think I'm just going to let them try and take the fine from me.

Just a note, I think (someone else would need to verify) that the price you are shown is before any subsidy you might be eligible for. So if you are eligible, you'll need to take that into account when calculating your costs.

huh, if they do it that way it's stupid. All I see is an enroll button, and when I click that it asks me if I am sure I want to enroll. I sure as hell ain't enrolling in something if they're not giving me all the info up front.

Call the Ohio Department of Insurance and ask them where you can find a list of trained 'navigators'.

One of my Tea Party friends posted this morning on FB that the ACA will cost her family $14,400 more per year than what they are currently paying. Bookended with a "Thanks Obama", of course.

I'm sorely tempted to throw the bullshit flag...

Were you ever able to extract any more details about this claim?

Fox News' Sean Hannity did a segment about a week ago "exposing" the terrible costs ObamaCare piles onto the helpless citizenry. The problem? It turns out the three all-American couples Hannity chose to share their stories were either lying or being pridefully ignorant of the law, and Fox assumed no one would conduct follow up interviews to fact check their claims.

First I spoke with Paul Cox of Leicester, N.C. He and his wife Michelle had lamented to Hannity that because of Obamacare, they can’t grow their construction business and they have kept their employees below a certain number of hours, so that they are part-timers.

Obamacare has no effect on businesses with 49 employees or less. But in our brief conversation on the phone, Paul revealed that he has only four employees. Why the cutback on his workforce? “Well,” he said, “I haven’t been forced to do so, it’s just that I’ve chosen to do so. I have to deal with increased costs.” What costs? And how, I asked him, is any of it due to Obamacare? There was a long pause, after which he said he’d call me back. He never did.

Read the whole article. The second story is particularly striking: a brettmcd-esque tale of a family that loves their existing health insurance plan even though it won't cover their daughter due to a preexisting condition, and is really angry about being forced into a plan that will cover everyone. The catch? They don't know the new plan will be a lot *less* expensive because they haven't bothered to look.

Fox sets out to highlight how badly ObamaCare is hurting average Americans and goes 0-3 on finding anyone in the country to help make that case. They earnestly *believe* they're being hurt though, so that's practically the same thing.

One of my Tea Party friends posted this morning on FB that the ACA will cost her family $14,400 more per year than what they are currently paying. Bookended with a "Thanks Obama", of course.

I'm sorely tempted to throw the bullshit flag...

Were you ever able to extract any more details about this claim?

Nah, decided not to push her on it. She's a good friend, even if she goes off the deep end politically.

Quote

Fox News' Sean Hannity did a segment about a week ago "exposing" the terrible costs ObamaCare piles onto the helpless citizenry. The problem? It turns out the three all-American couples Hannity chose to share their stories were either lying or being pridefully ignorant of the law, and Fox assumed no one would conduct follow up interviews to fact check their claims.

First I spoke with Paul Cox of Leicester, N.C. He and his wife Michelle had lamented to Hannity that because of Obamacare, they can’t grow their construction business and they have kept their employees below a certain number of hours, so that they are part-timers.

Obamacare has no effect on businesses with 49 employees or less. But in our brief conversation on the phone, Paul revealed that he has only four employees. Why the cutback on his workforce? “Well,” he said, “I haven’t been forced to do so, it’s just that I’ve chosen to do so. I have to deal with increased costs.” What costs? And how, I asked him, is any of it due to Obamacare? There was a long pause, after which he said he’d call me back. He never did.

Read the whole article. The second story is particularly striking: a brettmcd-esque tale of a family that loves their existing health insurance plan even though it won't cover their daughter due to a preexisting condition, and is really angry about being forced into a plan that will cover everyone. The catch? They don't know the new plan will be a lot *less* expensive because they haven't bothered to look.

Fox sets out to highlight how badly ObamaCare is hurting average Americans and goes 0-3 on finding anyone in the country to help make that case. They earnestly *believe* they're being hurt though, so that's practically the same thing.

One of my Tea Party friends posted this morning on FB that the ACA will cost her family $14,400 more per year than what they are currently paying. Bookended with a "Thanks Obama", of course.

I'm sorely tempted to throw the bullshit flag...

Were you ever able to extract any more details about this claim?

Fox News' Sean Hannity did a segment about a week ago "exposing" the terrible costs ObamaCare piles onto the helpless citizenry. The problem? It turns out the three all-American couples Hannity chose to share their stories were either lying or being pridefully ignorant of the law, and Fox assumed no one would conduct follow up interviews to fact check their claims.

First I spoke with Paul Cox of Leicester, N.C. He and his wife Michelle had lamented to Hannity that because of Obamacare, they can’t grow their construction business and they have kept their employees below a certain number of hours, so that they are part-timers.

Obamacare has no effect on businesses with 49 employees or less. But in our brief conversation on the phone, Paul revealed that he has only four employees. Why the cutback on his workforce? “Well,” he said, “I haven’t been forced to do so, it’s just that I’ve chosen to do so. I have to deal with increased costs.” What costs? And how, I asked him, is any of it due to Obamacare? There was a long pause, after which he said he’d call me back. He never did.

Read the whole article. The second story is particularly striking: a brettmcd-esque tale of a family that loves their existing health insurance plan even though it won't cover their daughter due to a preexisting condition, and is really angry about being forced into a plan that will cover everyone. The catch? They don't know the new plan will be a lot *less* expensive because they haven't bothered to look.

Fox sets out to highlight how badly ObamaCare is hurting average Americans and goes 0-3 on finding anyone in the country to help make that case. They earnestly *believe* they're being hurt though, so that's practically the same thing.

-Autistic Angel

Wow AA there you go again. Comparing me to something I have never said and what is exactly the opposite of my situation. Again, I currently have a plan that will cost me much less then anything Obamacare offers AND covers me with the preexisting condition I have. But keep making stuff up you think I have said and shoving my name into situations that have no bearing to ANYTHING I have said.

Am I wrong to think that this program is for people who don't have employers that compensate health insurance? You should have a better program through work, it's a perk they give in order to keep their employees happy and to lure new hires.

Am I wrong to think that this program is for people who don't have employers that compensate health insurance? You should have a better program through work, it's a perk they give in order to keep their employees happy and to lure new hires.

Getting rid of that "benefit" that employers use to keep actual salaries down is one of the many steps the USA needs to take to have a health system that makes sense. If companies start dropping health insurance benefits without compensating with an increased salary, they're going to lose their best people. It's a self-correcting process.

There are occasional high-end jobs over here too where you get health care benefits, but they take a different form and are much smaller in impact. I've got a pretty good one (one that took me by surprise when I was employed at my current job since I had never encountered such benefits before) where I can get special deals on eye examinations and a guarantee that I'll never have to wait more than 2 months for an operation, and so on. It's a very minor part of the total package I was offered to work there, yet still an unusually good one for Norwegian workplaces. We have free health care over here anyway, so there's not much actual value that can be offered above and beyond that.

And many many more people will be entering those ranks as companies discontinue their health insurance. If that was to happen to me I would be completely screwed. I don't have the extra money to pay more for crappier insurance.

Am I wrong to think that this program is for people who don't have employers that compensate health insurance? You should have a better program through work, it's a perk they give in order to keep their employees happy and to lure new hires.

Getting rid of that "benefit" that employers use to keep actual salaries down is one of the many steps the USA needs to take to have a health system that makes sense. If companies start dropping health insurance benefits without compensating with an increased salary, they're going to lose their best people. It's a self-correcting process.

There are occasional high-end jobs over here too where you get health care benefits, but they take a different form and are much smaller in impact. I've got a pretty good one (one that took me by surprise when I was employed at my current job since I had never encountered such benefits before) where I can get special deals on eye examinations and a guarantee that I'll never have to wait more than 2 months for an operation, and so on. It's a very minor part of the total package I was offered to work there, yet still an unusually good one for Norwegian workplaces. We have free health care over here anyway, so there's not much actual value that can be offered above and beyond that.

To me it seems not having to wait forever to get treated is a damn big benefit.

So far, every friend I've had in the real world who's complained about increased prices under Obamacare has actually been comparing the portion of their health insurance premiums they pay, when the employer pays most of it, to the full prices of the insurance premiums listed on the Obamacare website. Only one of them was willing to check his pay stub, and compare the actual cost of his health insurance to the ACA health insurance. The ACA health insurance was, of course, actually cheaper.

I'm on the economic opportunity commission for my city, and we met with one of the navigators last Wednesday. What's really sad, is that 60% of the people she spoken to Don't even make 100% of the federal poverty level income for their family size. In a state that is fully implementing Obamacare, these families would be eligible for full Medicaid coverage. But because Virginia has not fully implemented Obamacare these people are neither eligible for expanded Medicaid, nor are they eligible for a subsidy to purchase health insurance on the exchanges. I consider this to be criminal on the part of the Virginia government.

Hopefully, if the Democrat wins the governor's race next month, he'll be able to get Virginia on the expanded Medicaid program.

There are a lot of misconceptions out there regarding Obamacare. A lot of people, especially those who are opposed to it, think that everyone is going to be required to leave their current health insurance and purchased policies on the exchange. Others don't realize that the health insurance they have will get better under Obamacare, as lifetime and annual caps are phased out. Of course, Republican politicians have encouraged these, and other, misconceptions.

In fact, the basic elements of Obamacare are incredibly popular amongst the population. Obviously, with the exception of the individual mandate.

I think in previous threads I've mentioned my friend Matt, who had cancer as a child. Because the kind of cancer he had, in his adult life he has never been able to afford health insurance. Even when we both worked for the state of Texas, he couldn't afford the premiums he would've been charged under the state's group plan. Under Obamacare, he is able to purchase health insurance with good benefits and a reasonable premium. He's able to take proactive responsibility for his own health. He's going to live longer, and be healthier, and be more productive. That's not just a net gain from Matt, that's a net gain for his entire community, and all of us.

When Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and other Republicans say they want to repeal Obamacare, what they're really saying is they want to take people like Matt, and throw them out of the healthcare system. Perhaps it's because I just left church this morning, but I find that a particularly un-Christian attitude to take.

And many many more people will be entering those ranks as companies discontinue their health insurance. If that was to happen to me I would be completely screwed. I don't have the extra money to pay more for crappier insurance.

Then those companies are cutting employee's salaries. Companies don't offer health insurance because they want to be nice, it's a benefit to get good employees. If they get rid of it, they would lose their advantage in hiring unless they offer better wages. Not to mention the backlash of giving a pay cut to their current employees.

I recently attended a seminar that advised that since I have health care for life, that when negotiating a salary I should ask for more since I would being making less compared to my future coworkers who need the insurance.

Are companies actually cutting health insurance because of the new government program, or is this just a scare tactic used to oppose it?

And many many more people will be entering those ranks as companies discontinue their health insurance. If that was to happen to me I would be completely screwed. I don't have the extra money to pay more for crappier insurance.

If your company discontinues their benefit, they'll have to compensate you with higher salary, right? So you'll have the extra money to pay more.

I suspect that some less scrupulous companies are going to find ways to cut their costs by dropping health plans without making the requisite change in salaries, then blame it on the health care act. Hopefully those companies see their more important employees leave en masse.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I suspect that some less scrupulous companies are going to find ways to cut their costs by dropping health plans without making the requisite change in salaries, then blame it on the health care act. Hopefully those companies see their more important employees leave en masse.

I am sure you are right, and Fox News will be there to blame the President. They will have the CEO on praising him and Brett will be doing his "I told you so".

My employer just flirted with no longer providing insurance premium support for staff, and it was clear the result would have been a mass exodus of older and more experienced employees.

If I were the CEO of a big company, I'd drop the health plan, give my employees 80-90% of the money I was spending on their insurance, and pocket the rest to cover the ACA's fines for not providing health insurance. I'd be very happy to get out of the insurance business and I doubt that very many employees would jump ship when they saw their paychecks go up -- especially if the practice becomes widespread and eventually normal.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, we scoffed at the idea that companies would end their pension plans. I can see health insurance going the same way.

Am I wrong to think that this program is for people who don't have employers that compensate health insurance? You should have a better program through work, it's a perk they give in order to keep their employees happy and to lure new hires.

Getting rid of that "benefit" that employers use to keep actual salaries down is one of the many steps the USA needs to take to have a health system that makes sense. If companies start dropping health insurance benefits without compensating with an increased salary, they're going to lose their best people. It's a self-correcting process.

There are occasional high-end jobs over here too where you get health care benefits, but they take a different form and are much smaller in impact. I've got a pretty good one (one that took me by surprise when I was employed at my current job since I had never encountered such benefits before) where I can get special deals on eye examinations and a guarantee that I'll never have to wait more than 2 months for an operation, and so on. It's a very minor part of the total package I was offered to work there, yet still an unusually good one for Norwegian workplaces. We have free health care over here anyway, so there's not much actual value that can be offered above and beyond that.

In Canada it is similar - drugs, eyecare and dental are the ones that are only covered if they are essential.

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

My employer just flirted with no longer providing insurance premium support for staff, and it was clear the result would have been a mass exodus of older and more experienced employees.

If I were the CEO of a big company, I'd drop the health plan, give my employees 80-90% of the money I was spending on their insurance, and pocket the rest to cover the ACA's fines for not providing health insurance. I'd be very happy to get out of the insurance business and I doubt that very many employees would jump ship when they saw their paychecks go up -- especially if the practice becomes widespread and eventually normal.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, we scoffed at the idea that companies would end their pension plans. I can see health insurance going the same way.

Then we all get to wait months for 'non essential' surgury like happens in countries with single payer goverment provided health care. Not a system I would care to be a part of.

My employer just flirted with no longer providing insurance premium support for staff, and it was clear the result would have been a mass exodus of older and more experienced employees.

If I were the CEO of a big company, I'd drop the health plan, give my employees 80-90% of the money I was spending on their insurance, and pocket the rest to cover the ACA's fines for not providing health insurance. I'd be very happy to get out of the insurance business and I doubt that very many employees would jump ship when they saw their paychecks go up -- especially if the practice becomes widespread and eventually normal.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, we scoffed at the idea that companies would end their pension plans. I can see health insurance going the same way.

Then we all get to wait months for 'non essential' surgury like happens in countries with single payer goverment provided health care. Not a system I would care to be a part of.

Obamacare is not government provided health care. We still buy our insurance from for-profit companies and visit private providers. Your employer just might decide not to be in the loop anymore. "Here's your insurance money back, deal with it yourself" has got to be very tempting.

If it's any consolation to those of you who like your employer subsidies, what I described did not happen under Romneycare. Employer-provided insurance is still the norm here.

Id like to know where you all live that the economy is so great that a person can just quit a job and have another one just sitting there for them to take.

The economy has been bad for quite awhile, how many pay cuts have you had?

You should be happy that there is a choice now Brett, before if your company cut your healthcare, with your pre-existing condition you would have nothing since no insurance company would take you. Now if that happens, you will have something, it will just cost you more.

Id like to know where you all live that the economy is so great that a person can just quit a job and have another one just sitting there for them to take.

The economy has been bad for quite awhile, how many pay cuts have you had?

You should be happy that there is a choice now Brett, before if your company cut your healthcare, with your pre-existing condition you would have nothing since no insurance company would take you. Now if that happens, you will have something, it will just cost you more.

I was out of work for almost 2 years, I would call that a pretty drastic pay cut.

As for the last part I wouldn't have a choice to make as I would be getting fined for not having insurance as there was not a single plan I saw on the exchange I could afford.

My employer just flirted with no longer providing insurance premium support for staff, and it was clear the result would have been a mass exodus of older and more experienced employees.

If I were the CEO of a big company, I'd drop the health plan, give my employees 80-90% of the money I was spending on their insurance, and pocket the rest to cover the ACA's fines for not providing health insurance. I'd be very happy to get out of the insurance business and I doubt that very many employees would jump ship when they saw their paychecks go up -- especially if the practice becomes widespread and eventually normal.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, we scoffed at the idea that companies would end their pension plans. I can see health insurance going the same way.

Then we all get to wait months for 'non essential' surgury like happens in countries with single payer goverment provided health care. Not a system I would care to be a part of.

Yeah, it's good that you and/or your employer can pay out the nose for that kind of service right? I mean, screw the poor! If they can't afford healthcare, they shouldn't have gotten hurt to begin with.

Id like to know where you all live that the economy is so great that a person can just quit a job and have another one just sitting there for them to take.

The economy has been bad for quite awhile, how many pay cuts have you had?

You should be happy that there is a choice now Brett, before if your company cut your healthcare, with your pre-existing condition you would have nothing since no insurance company would take you. Now if that happens, you will have something, it will just cost you more.

I was out of work for almost 2 years, I would call that a pretty drastic pay cut.

As for the last part I wouldn't have a choice to make as I would be getting fined for not having insurance as there was not a single plan I saw on the exchange I could afford.

Well then you would qualify for Medicaid in most cases, unless you live in a red state that is refusing federal subsidies of course.

Yes that is exactly what I said, word for word, you must be taking lessons from AA on making things up.

No, you didn't say shit. If you were to rectify that situation, maybe that would help. So tell us, how do you propose to get your "I'm so ridiculously overpaid for my qualifications that I don't dare threaten to quit" health benefits while not letting the poor bend over and take it the way the sun doesn't shine?

Id like to know where you all live that the economy is so great that a person can just quit a job and have another one just sitting there for them to take.

The economy has been bad for quite awhile, how many pay cuts have you had?

You should be happy that there is a choice now Brett, before if your company cut your healthcare, with your pre-existing condition you would have nothing since no insurance company would take you. Now if that happens, you will have something, it will just cost you more.

I was out of work for almost 2 years, I would call that a pretty drastic pay cut.

As for the last part I wouldn't have a choice to make as I would be getting fined for not having insurance as there was not a single plan I saw on the exchange I could afford.

If your employer decides to get out of the insurance business, he will presumably give you most or all of the money that he's been using to subsidize your insurance. He needs to do that to keep his workforce because that's what all the other cool kids are doing.

Let me toss out some numbers for illustration. I don't know what your policy costs, but let's use $1000/mo for a round number (ours is $1200). You said your employer picks up most of it, so let's say they're paying $800 and you're paying $200. You're going to get a "raise" of $1000/mo -- the $800 your employer was paying on your behalf plus the $200 that you won't be paying anymore. Now are there any plans on the exchange that you can afford? If you make less than 4x the poverty line, figure in a little help from Uncle Sam.

Of course you don't see anything on the exchange for $200. You have to compare their prices to the total cost of your plan, not just the fraction that you're paying now.

You are dreaming if you think employers who drop health coverage are going to give all the money they paid for insurance back to the employees to do the exact same job they were doing before. It just isn't going to happen. Also many very large companies like where I work are self insured, so there isn't some set price they pay to another company each month for our coverage. They just pay for health care costs directly from company funds.

You are dreaming if you think employers who drop health coverage are going to give all the money they paid for insurance back to the employees to do the exact same job they were doing before. It just isn't going to happen.

As much as it pains me to agree with brett, I think he's right on this one.

In a perfect world, if a company drops their insurance and sends everyone to the exchanges, they would provide an raise equivalent to what they were previously paying. In reality, however, I seriously doubt that's going to happen. My guess is that lots of companies will simply drop employee's insurance with NO raise and either a) hope that their employees don't look elsewhere or b) use it as an opportunity to bring in cheaper labor.

That's been one of my biggest concerns about ACA from the get-go. Companies are going to use this as a cost-cutting measure because there are lots of people out there looking for jobs. They might lose some talent, but when people are strapped for cash or enjoy what they do, they're going to be reluctant to look elsewhere.

You are dreaming if you think employers who drop health coverage are going to give all the money they paid for insurance back to the employees to do the exact same job they were doing before. It just isn't going to happen.

As much as it pains me to agree with brett, I think he's right on this one.

In a perfect world, if a company drops their insurance and sends everyone to the exchanges, they would provide an raise equivalent to what they were previously paying. In reality, however, I seriously doubt that's going to happen. My guess is that lots of companies will simply drop employee's insurance with NO raise and either a) hope that their employees don't look elsewhere or b) use it as an opportunity to bring in cheaper labor.

That's been one of my biggest concerns about ACA from the get-go. Companies are going to use this as a cost-cutting measure because there are lots of people out there looking for jobs. They might lose some talent, but when people are strapped for cash or enjoy what they do, they're going to be reluctant to look elsewhere.

What is there to stop an employer from doing this in a universe with no Obamacare? Or - to rephrase the question, neglecting the Obamacare option, how many of us think that the health insurance plans our employers give us are equal to or better than the health insurance plans we received fifteen years ago?

Personally, given that fifteen years ago I didn't really have to worry about whether I was in coverage or out of coverage, it was a lot better back then than it is now.

Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush."Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."

What is there to stop an employer from doing this in a universe with no Obamacare? Or - to rephrase the question, neglecting the Obamacare option, how many of us think that the health insurance plans our employers give us are equal to or better than the health insurance plans we received fifteen years ago?

Because now they have a convenient scapegoat for gutting insurance. Whether it's really true or not (and we all know how little people are actually paying attention outside of their preferred news provider's soundbites), they can now say "Obamacare is forcing us to discontinue health insurance" instead of "we're going to slash your benefits to increase our profit margin". The latter would send people running for the exits while the former might not.

I'm just speculating here. My hope is that companies will realize they still need to care for the employees in order to retain talent, but we all know that $$ will trump everything.

You are dreaming if you think employers who drop health coverage are going to give all the money they paid for insurance back to the employees to do the exact same job they were doing before. It just isn't going to happen.

As much as it pains me to agree with brett, I think he's right on this one.

In a perfect world, if a company drops their insurance and sends everyone to the exchanges, they would provide an raise equivalent to what they were previously paying. In reality, however, I seriously doubt that's going to happen. My guess is that lots of companies will simply drop employee's insurance with NO raise and either a) hope that their employees don't look elsewhere or b) use it as an opportunity to bring in cheaper labor.

That's been one of my biggest concerns about ACA from the get-go. Companies are going to use this as a cost-cutting measure because there are lots of people out there looking for jobs. They might lose some talent, but when people are strapped for cash or enjoy what they do, they're going to be reluctant to look elsewhere.

Increasingly, the jobs that provide decent health benefits are jobs filled by workers with a college education. The current unemployment rate for people with college degrees is under 4%. It is not entirely an employers' market when it comes to the jobs scene. The present level of unemployment is highly dependent on your education status.

Employers with more than 49 employees will get fined if they drop insurance.

And, of course, businesses seeking employees will be at a competitive disadvantage if they do not offer health insurance. In the long run, that's going to weigh on the future prospects of businesses that go that route.

If you think your employer might drop employee health insurance coverage, that also sounds like a decent reason to look into forming a union.

Year-over-year cost increases in healthcare have been pushing coverage out of the range that most businesses could afford for the last couple decades. It's been a self-perpetuating cycle: premiums rise, businesses cut coverage options for their employees, those employees then leave minor problems to fester until astronomically expensive emergency care is required, bankruptcies ensue, and healthcare costs rise as a result. Goto 10.

Democrats originally wanted an employer mandate, requiring businesses to provide comprehensive health coverage for their workers. Large pools of healthy people in the system bring down costs for everyone. Republicans complained -- stop me if you've heard this one -- that this would kill jobs and wreck the economy, so they proposed the individual mandate which exists in the ACA today. Same end result, but more of the burden is shifted from big businesses onto people who may our may not be employed, self-employed, part-time, etc.

Will businesses take advantage of this to start pushing workers off their company insurance and towards the government exchanges? Almost certainly, but the crucial thing to remember is that there is no plausible circumstance in which that wasn't going to continue happening anyway. brettmcd can bemoan the prospective loss of his awesome subsidized insurance plan all day long, but rising costs would have stripped it away within a few years no matter what. The difference is that IF that happens now, he'll have guaranteed alternatives that won't cost him $20,000 a year.

Finally, I have to agree with brettmcd and Gratch that companies choosing to eliminate health insurance benefits are very unlikely to pour all the savings back into their payroll. Those that do will undoubtedly make up for it in other ways, such as classifying it as a pay raise and placing a freeze on additional raises for rank-and-file workers. That's not evil; it's elementary capitalism, and the idea that all the really talented workers would pack up for greener pastures implies there's someplace left to go.

Need proof? "Stingy employers will be punished by the Invisible Hand of the Free Market!" has been a major argument used to combat unions for forty years, steadily whittling away membership as workers are promised better pay and benefits without all those needless union dues, purely because companies treasure their workers so much. The result has been a nationwide flattening of wages during decades of unprecedented corporate profits as people are required to work harder, longer, and more productively without any commiserate rise in their take home pay or benefits.

I can't imagine why eliminating healthcare benefits would work out any differently.